Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6422618" data-attributes="member: 22779">But, you're missing the point.&nbsp; The DM must provide the quest at the behest of the player.&nbsp; The warhorse only exists, the quest only exists, because the PLAYER made it so.&nbsp; How is this not player authorial control over the game world?&nbsp; You can justify it in game any way you like.&nbsp; The player says, &quot;I want my horse quest now&quot; and the DM responds by sending the horse quest in a dream.&nbsp; It's exactly the same as, &quot;I want some boxes in the alleyway&quot; and the DM saying, &quot;You look around and notice some boxes that you missed before&quot;.&nbsp; The point of the exercise is that the player is initiating the game world change.&nbsp; [MENTION=10479]Mark CMG[/MENTION] apparently doesn't consider this to be player authorial control since the player can't simply dictate the existence of the boxes or the existence of family members in the town.But the player absolutely can dictate the existence of the warhorse in the game world AND gets to tell the DM when he wants to go get that warhorse.Look, I'm not trying to say that early D&amp;D was a story game.&nbsp; Of course not.&nbsp; That would be ridiculous.&nbsp; The only point I'm making here is that early D&amp;D, and early RPG's had all sorts of story telling elements in them, mostly implicit, and the idea that early RPG's were somehow &quot;pure&quot; RPG's, free from story telling elements is ridiculous.&nbsp; There's been no refutation of my points, simply nay-saying and &quot;Nuh uh, that's not story telling elements&quot;.&nbsp; There's been numerous examples in this thread of story telling elements that would be perfectly acceptable in any version of D&amp;D or any RPG.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6422618, member: 22779"] But, you're missing the point. The DM [u]must provide the quest at the behest of the player[/u]. The warhorse only exists, the quest only exists, because the PLAYER made it so. How is this not player authorial control over the game world? You can justify it in game any way you like. The player says, "I want my horse quest now" and the DM responds by sending the horse quest in a dream. It's exactly the same as, "I want some boxes in the alleyway" and the DM saying, "You look around and notice some boxes that you missed before". The point of the exercise is that the player is initiating the game world change. [MENTION=10479]Mark CMG[/MENTION] apparently doesn't consider this to be player authorial control since the player can't simply dictate the existence of the boxes or the existence of family members in the town. But the player absolutely can dictate the existence of the warhorse in the game world AND gets to tell the DM when he wants to go get that warhorse. Look, I'm not trying to say that early D&D was a story game. Of course not. That would be ridiculous. The only point I'm making here is that early D&D, and early RPG's had all sorts of story telling elements in them, mostly implicit, and the idea that early RPG's were somehow "pure" RPG's, free from story telling elements is ridiculous. There's been no refutation of my points, simply nay-saying and "Nuh uh, that's not story telling elements". There's been numerous examples in this thread of story telling elements that would be perfectly acceptable in any version of D&D or any RPG. [/QUOTE]

Verification